Comments by "Moon Shoes" (@moonshoes11) on "Did Moses Exist?" video.

@disguisedcentennial835 No, there really isn’t.
20
@disguisedcentennial835 You posted a claim. Historians disagree. Are you an arm chair historian disagreeing with actual historians? Because that demonstrates a lack of evidence, and unwarranted beliefs.
8
@YaBoiSneedMan Except it can’t. So you’re still convinced of a supernatural event without warrant. Right?
5
@disguisedcentennial835 I don’t see a link, however I do know that actual historians disagree with your claim. And yes, it is a claim. The claim is that there is evidence for the Exodus. That claim isn’t supported supported by evidence, nor by historians. You’re convinced, but for poor reasons. You’re chasing confirmation bias.
5
@disguisedcentennial835 You need to do better, really. The Bible story claims there was a mass Exodus of people that got lost in the desert for decades. Historians agree that there we no Hebrew slaves in large numbers in Egypt. Also, consider the number of supposed Hebrew slaves, and the distance they were attempting to travel, but got lost…. If they made a single file line, the first Hebrew would reach their destination before the last left Egypt.
5
Historicity The overwhelming consensus among scholars is that the story in the Book of Exodus is best understood as a myth and cannot be treated as history in any verifiable sense. Archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman say that archaeology has not found any evidence for even a small band of wandering Israelites living in the Sinai: "The conclusion – that Exodus did not happen at the time and in the manner described in the Bible – seems irrefutable [...] repeated excavations and surveys throughout the entire area have not provided even the slightest evidence". Instead, modern archaeology suggests continuity between Canaanite and Israelite settlement, indicating a primarily Canaanite origin for Israel, with no suggestion that a group of foreigners from Egypt comprised early Israel .
5
@ciao_abhi There are many historians, who on behalf of the church or educational foundation, attempt to study the Bible….who have also committed to those beliefs and their implied bias. Their jobs require them to hold to the belief, regardless of what the historicity demonstrates. In that light, their bias taints their results from the beginning. This is especially true when pursing the resurrection claims. I also find the phrasing of “truth of the religion” pretty slippery. Truth to specific claims is always better. I mean, Egypt did and does still exist. Of course, their is truth to that. Jesus may have even existed as a human. There may be truth to that. But it doesn’t validate the “truth of the religion”….mostly because of all the associated baggage, and supernatural claims. :)
4
@disguisedcentennial835 Sure, you’re convinced…. It for poor reasons. Remember, the Bible is the claim, not the evidence. What is your best evidence? Are you even aware the exodus is t a historical event? Moses is a fictional character?
3
@disguisedcentennial835 You didn’t provide any. Right above my first reply is just you making a fallacious claim.
2
@disguisedcentennial835 You didn’t bother to look at what I provided.
1
@disguisedcentennial835 Try citing sources.
1